Search

Multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) breast cancers have been comprehensively studied, and their outcomes have been compared with unifocal (UF) tumors. We attempted to answer the following questions: (1) Does MF/MC presentation influence the outcome concerning BC mortality?, (2) Is there an impact of guideline-adherent adjuvant treatment in these BC subtypes?, and (3)What is the influence of guideline violations concerning surgery (breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy) on the survival of MF/MC BC patients? Between 1992 and 2008, we retrospectively analyzed 8,935 breast cancer patients from 17 participating breast cancer centers within the BRENDA study group. Of 8,935 breast cancer patients, 7,073 (79.2 %) had UF tumors, 1,398 (15.6 %) had MF tumors, and 464 (5.2 %) had MC tumors. RFS was significantly worse for MF/MC BC patients compared to patients with UF tumors (MF p = 0.007; MC p = 0.019). OAS was significantly worse for MC patients but not for MF patients compared to patients with UF tumors (MF p = 0.321; MC p = 0.001). Guideline adherence was significantly lower in patients with MF ( n = 580; 41.5 %) and MC ( n = 204; 44.0 %) compared to patients with UF ( n = 3,871; 54.7 %) ( p < 0.001) tumors. Guideline violations were associated with a highly significant deterioration in survival throughout all subgroups except for MC, with respect to RFS and OAS. For 100 %-guideline-adherent patients, we could not find any significant differences in RFS and OAS after adjusting by nodal status, grade, and tumor size. Furthermore, we could not find any significant differences in RFS and OAS in patients with MF or MC stratified by breast-conserving therapy ( BCT lumpectomy and radiation therapy) and mastectomy. There is a strong association between improved RFS and OAS in patients with MF/MZ BC. There are no significant differences in RFS and OAS for patients with breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims The purpose of this part of the INTERVENT project was (1) to redefine and individually predict post-procedural complications associated with coronary interventions, including alternative/adjunctive techniques to PTCA and (2) to employ the prognostic INTERVENT computer model to clarify the structural relationship between (pre)-procedural risk factors and post-procedural outcome. Methods and Results In a multicentre study, 2500 data items of 455 consecutive patients (mean age: 61·1±8·3 years; 33–84 years) undergoing coronary interventions at three university centres were analysed. 80·4% of the patients were male, 16·7% had unstable angina, and 5·1%/10·1% acute/subacute myocardial infarction. There were multiple or multivessel stenoses in 16·0%, vessel bending >90° in 14·5%, irregular vessel contours in 65·0%, moderate calcifications in 20·9%, moderate/severe vessel tortuosity in 53·2% and a diameter stenosis of 90%–99% in 44·4% of cases. The in-lab (out-of-lab) complications were: 0·4% (0·9%) death, 1·8% (0·2%) abrupt vessel closure with myocardial infarction and 5·5% (4·0) haemodynamic disorders. Conclusion Computer algorithms derived from artificial intelligence were able to predict the individual risk of these post-procedural complications with an accuracy of >95% and to explain the structural relationship between risk factors and post-procedural complications. The most important prognostic factors were: heart failure (NYHA class), use of adjunctive/alternative techniques (rotablation, atherectomy, laser), acute coronary ischaemia, pre-existent cardiac medication, stenosis length, stenosis morphology (calcification), gender, age, amount of contrast agent and smoker status. Pre-medication with aspirin or other cardiac medication had a beneficial effect. Techniques, such as laser angioplasty or atherectomy were predictors for post-procedural complications. Single predictors alone were not able to describe the individual outcome completely. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: To identify subgroups of patients with pT1 pN0 breast cancer (BC) who might not profit from adjuvant systemic therapy (AST)., Methods: Data of 3,774 pT1 pN0 BC patients from 17 certified BC centres within the BRENDA study group were collected between 1992 and 2008 and retrospectively analysed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models., Results: 279 (7.4%) of the pT1 pN0 BC patients were T1a, 944 (25.0%) were T1b and 2,551 (67.6%) were T1c. There was no significant difference (p > 0.1) in recurrence-free survival (RFS)/overall survival (OAS) between patients with pT1a, pT1b, and T1c. Patients receiving any type of AST had a better outcome compared to women without AST after adjusting for age, tumour size, and intrinsic subtypes (RFS: p < 0.001; OAS: p < 0.001). AST was the most important prognostic parameter for RFS followed by intrinsic subtypes and age., Conclusion: Patients with pT1 pN0 BC profit from AST independently of molecular subtypes, tumour size, age or comorbidity, with 5-year RFS of more than 95%. The correct definition of subgroups of patients who do not need AST is still an open question., (© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The purpose of this retrospective multicenter study was to resolve the pseudo-paradox that the clinical outcome of women affected by breast cancer has improved during the last 20 years irrespective of whether they were treated in accordance with clinical guidelines or not. This retrospective German multicenter study included 9061 patients with primary breast cancer recruited from 1991 to 2009. We formed subgroups for the time intervals 1991-2000 (TI1) and 2001-2009 (TI2). In these subgroups, the risk of recurrence (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients whose treatment was either 100% guideline-conforming or, respectively, non-guideline-conforming. The clinical outcome of all patients significantly improved in TI2 compared to TI1 [RFS: p < 0.001, HR = 0.57, 95% CI (0.49-0.67); OS: p < 0.001, HR = 0.76, 95% (CI 0.66-0.87)]. OS and RFS of guideline non-adherent patients also improved in TI2 compared to TI. Comparing risk profiles, determined by Nottingham Prognostic Score reveals a significant (p = 0.001) enhancement in the time cohort TI2. Furthermore, the percentage of guideline-conforming systemic therapy (endocrine therapy and chemotherapy) significantly increased (p < 0.001) in the time cohort TI2 to TI for the non-adherent group. The general improvement of clinical outcome of patients during the last 20 years is also valid in the subgroup of women who received treatments, which deviated from the guidelines. The shift in risk profiles as well as medical advances are major reasons for this improvement. Nevertheless, patients with 100% guideline-conforming therapy always had a better outcome compared to patients with guideline non-adherent therapy.

Objectives: In patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), rapid triage is essential. The aim of this study was to establish a tool for risk prediction of 30-day cardiac events (CE) on admission. 30-day cardiac events (CE) were defined as early coronary revascularization, subsequent myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death within 30 days., Methods and Results: This single-centre, prospective cohort study included 377 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected ACS and for whom troponin T measurements were requested on clinical grounds. Fifteen biomarkers were analyzed in the admission sample, and clinical parameters were assessed by the TIMI risk score for unstable angina/Non-ST myocardial infarction and the GRACE risk score. Sixty-nine (18%) patients presented with and 308 (82%) without ST-elevations, respectively. Coronary angiography was performed in 165 (44%) patients with subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention--accounting for the majority of CE--in 123 (33%) patients, respectively. Eleven out of 15 biomarkers were elevated in patients with CE compared to those without. High-sensitive troponin T (hs-cTnT) was the best univariate biomarker to predict CE in Non-ST-elevation patients (AUC 0.80), but did not yield incremental information above clinical TIMI risk score (AUC 0.80 vs 0.82, p = 0.69). Equivalence testing of AUCs of risk models and non-inferiority testing demonstrated that the clinical TIMI risk score alone was non-inferior to its combination with hs-cTnT in predicting CE., Conclusions: In patients presenting without ST-elevations, identification of those prone to CE is best based on clinical assessment based on TIMI risk score criteria and hs-cTnT.

The evaluation of the German Mammography Screening Program requires record linkage with data from cancer registries in order to measure the number of false-negative mammograms and interval cancers. This study aims at evaluating the performance of the established linkage method based on identifiers encrypted by the standard procedure of the German cancer registries. In addition, the results are compared with an alternative method based on plain text identifiers. A total of 16,572 records from the Bremen Mammography Screening Pilot Study were linked with data from the Bremen Cancer Registry. Based on a gold standard set of matching record pairs, homonym and synonym errors were determined. Given the customary threshold value in cancer registries, the plain text method showed a lower rate of synonym errors (2.1-5.1%) and a lower rate of homonym errors (0.01-0.15%). As 10.4 million women are invited to take part biennially in screening, the corresponding figures would be 3,237 homonym errors for the standard procedure and 294 using the plain text method provided equivalent conditions. The 11-fold increase in the homonym error rate documents the trade-off for better data protection using encrypted data.

Within the last years the prerequisite was prepared to develop a computerized tumor--patient documentation system including quality monitoring and oncological therapy recommendations for every day use. In medicine today, there is an increasing need for quality oriented low cost and transparent management--what is especially true in the field of oncology. The German Federal Authority of Health demands the documentation of all tumor disorders for the establishment of an cancer registry. For these reasons our study group established the program "OncoDoc" in cooperation with the laboratory for Artificial Intelligence of the University Bremen.